Hi Andrew,
Thank you for a reply.
(2010/03/24 16:58), Andrew Beekhof wrote:
Although I'll probably change it slightly to differentiate between
partial and total failure:
+ if(crm_parse_int(attrvalue, "0")<= 0) {
+ print_as("\t: Link has failed (Expected=%d)",
e
Cristian Mammoli - Apra Sistemi wrote:
Thank you Andrew, I'll try to backport it.
Checking kernel:
Current kernel version: 2.6.18
Minimum kernel version: 2.6.31
FAILED!
I guess I'll have to wait for RHEL6 ;-(
Better chances with OCFS2?
--
Cristian Mammoli
APRA SISTEMI srl
Via Brodolini,6
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 07:59:26PM +, Mario Giammarco wrote:
> Andrew Beekhof writes:
>
> >
> > Have you seen:
> >http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/crm_fencing.html
> > I have been led to believe that STONITH
> > > will help prevent split brain situations, but the LINBIT instructions do
>
Andrew Beekhof wrote:
The piece thats probably missing is (dlm|gfs)_controld.pcmk from
cluster 3.0.7 (or later).
No idea what kernel or other GFS requirements that sucks in.
Thank you Andrew, I'll try to backport it.
Cheers
--
Cristian Mammoli
APRA SISTEMI srl
Via Brodolini,6 Jesi (AN)
tel di
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:40:54AM +, Joseph, Lester wrote:
> Yes they can. That's the confusing bit
>
> As I mentioned in previous email, we rebooted the switch and the nodes
> would have lost connectivity briefly. But the switch is back online
> now and the nodes have connectivity as the
I believe I have found the appropriate where I need to go. Looks like the
bug is assigned to you, let me know if I am incorrect.
Cheers.
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Travis Dolan wrote:
> I would like to know if it is possible to configure more than two resources
> within a collocation grou
Friends,
The ocf:pacemaker:Dummy example resource agent script specifies a default
monitoring interval (10)
which I assume is 10 seconds. This seems like the appropriate place to
specify this interval, ie.
the resource implementation knows how heavy weight the monitor is and what
is a good comprom
Hello Andrew,
I have created the report.
I do not know how to access your bugzilla. Could you please let me know
where/what to do.
Thanks in advance.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Travis Dolan wrote:
> > I would like to know if it
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 07:59:26PM +, Mario Giammarco wrote:
> Andrew Beekhof writes:
> > Have you seen:
> >http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/crm_fencing.html
> > I have been led to believe that STONITH
> > > will help prevent split brain situations, but the LINBIT instructions do
> > > not
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Mario Giammarco wrote:
> Andrew Beekhof writes:
>
>>
>> Have you seen:
>> http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/crm_fencing.html
>> I have been led to believe that STONITH
>> > will help prevent split brain situations, but the LINBIT instructions do
>> > not
>> > pro
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Cristian Mammoli - Apra Sistemi
wrote:
> What do I need to run a GFS filesystem on top of a dual primary drbd on
> Centos 5.4?
> The GFS packages from the distro are OK?
The piece thats probably missing is (dlm|gfs)_controld.pcmk from
cluster 3.0.7 (or later).
No
Andrew Beekhof writes:
>
> Have you seen:
>http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/crm_fencing.html
> I have been led to believe that STONITH
> > will help prevent split brain situations, but the LINBIT instructions do not
> > provide any guidance on how to conifgure STONITH in the pacemaker cluster.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Andreas Mock wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> you said that you're interested in the results of CTS running against
> pacemaker 1.0.8/corosync on real servers with openSuSE 11.2:
>
> I get quickly problems with the meanwhile identified (thanks to S. Drake)
> bug in shutting
What do I need to run a GFS filesystem on top of a dual primary drbd on
Centos 5.4?
The GFS packages from the distro are OK?
I have pacemaker installed from the the official repos of clusterlabs:
pacemaker-libs-1.0.8-1.el5
pacemaker-1.0.8-1.el5
corosynclib-1.2.0-1.el5
corosync-1.2.0-1.el5
openais
Pushed.
Good work!
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Yan Gao wrote:
> On 03/24/10 18:52, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Yan Gao wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> A suggestion/request was raised with regard to the utilization feature:
>>> The ability to see the remaining capacity of n
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:14 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> first of all: the succesful redesign of the clusterlabs website looks very
> nice and the splash page is a really good idea!
>
> However I found some small teething troubles:
>
> * "Explore" tab:
> - The link "Site updates" is not working yet.
fi
Hi Andrew,
you said that you're interested in the results of CTS running against
pacemaker 1.0.8/corosync on real servers with openSuSE 11.2:
I get quickly problems with the meanwhile identified (thanks to S. Drake)
bug in shutting down pacemaker and friends which causes corosync
to hang around i
Hi,
first of all: the succesful redesign of the clusterlabs website looks very
nice and the splash page is a really good idea!
However I found some small teething troubles:
* "Explore" tab:
- The link "Site updates" is not working yet.
- I would also suggest to add a direct link to the wiki (Ho
On 03/24/10 18:52, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Yan Gao wrote:
>> Hi,
>> A suggestion/request was raised with regard to the utilization feature:
>> The ability to see the remaining capacity of nodes, and how the load is
>> distributed right now.
>>
>> I've added a new
Yes they can. That's the confusing bit
As I mentioned in previous email, we rebooted the switch and the nodes would
have lost connectivity briefly. But the switch is back online now and the nodes
have connectivity as they did before. Yet the message is constantly being
generated despite my
2010/3/24 :
> Hi Andrew,
>
>> Do you mean: why is the clone on srv01 always $clone:0 but on srv02
>> its sometimes $clone:0 and sometimes $clone:1 ?
>
> yes.
>
> The replacement thought both nodes to be the same movement.
> Because it is "globally-unique=false".
globally-unique=false" means t
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Joseph, Lester <
lester.jos...@galacoral.com> wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> The nodes in question are Virtual machines. Interestingly, we had a
> maintenance window this morning to restart the switches on the bladecenter
> serving this cluster.
>
>
>
> Do I have to reboot
Thanks.
The nodes in question are Virtual machines. Interestingly, we had a maintenance
window this morning to restart the switches on the bladecenter serving this
cluster.
Do I have to reboot the VM's to resolve this. This is only beeing seen on one
of the nodes. I have already put this node i
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Yan Gao wrote:
> Hi,
> A suggestion/request was raised with regard to the utilization feature:
> The ability to see the remaining capacity of nodes, and how the load is
> distributed right now.
>
> I've added a new option "--show-utilization" of ptest to achieve t
Switch going bad?
Not sure, I don't use heartbeat much these days.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Joseph, Lester <
lester.jos...@galacoral.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Not sure if this has already mean addressed in this list….apologies if it
> has.
>
> Noticed a similar thread here
> http://www.gos
Hi,
Not sure if this has already mean addressed in this listapologies if it has.
Noticed a similar thread here
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/dev/32877?do=post_view_threaded.
But no viable solution.
In a two node cluster, which has been working fine for months now, I am now
g
Hi,
A suggestion/request was raised with regard to the utilization feature:
The ability to see the remaining capacity of nodes, and how the load is
distributed right now.
I've added a new option "--show-utilization" of ptest to achieve that.
Attached the patch. Please help review it. Thanks a lot
Hi Andrew,
> Do you mean: why is the clone on srv01 always $clone:0 but on srv02
> its sometimes $clone:0 and sometimes $clone:1 ?
yes.
The replacement thought both nodes to be the same movement.
Because it is "globally-unique=false".
Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.
--- Andrew Beekhof wrot
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:32 AM, Yuusuke IIDA
wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Please confirm it last time because I revised loop processing pointed out.
I like it :-)
Although I'll probably change it slightly to differentiate between
partial and total failure:
+ if(crm_parse_int(attrvalue
2010/3/24 :
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for comment.
>
>> So if I can summarize, you're saying that clnUMdummy02 should not be
>> allowed to run on srv01 because the combined number of failures is 6
>> (and clnUMdummy02 is a non-unique clone).
>>
>> And that the current behavior is that clnUMdummy0
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Travis Dolan wrote:
> I would like to know if it is possible to configure more than two resources
> within a collocation group.
>
> Simply put I have 10 Virtual IPs that will need to migrate from Node A to
> Node B in the event of any failures. I also need these I
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Alan Jones wrote:
> BTW: The order matters in the colocation rule. When I configure:
> colocation colo-master_worker -1: master worker
> Then "failback" is blocked by the stickiness. In my opinion this is a bug,
> but others may have an explanation.
The order i
32 matches
Mail list logo
